John E FLOYD, read um and weep cons

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
BUT NOT THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY IN THIS SITUATION. So no matter how you dance around it, your initial assertion was DEAD Wrong, as is your attempt here to salvage it.

Yet another proof the Left has no sense of humor or higher understanding of word play.

Yet another proof that the Right are intellectually dishonest cowards when faced with some facts that prove them wrong on any level.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yet another proof that the Right are intellectually dishonest cowards when faced with some facts that prove them wrong on any level.

Present some facts, and we can go from there...

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Yet another proof that the Right are intellectually dishonest cowards when faced with some facts that prove them wrong on any level.

Present some facts, and we can go from there...

You're babbling. What exactly did I say that wasn't factual on the outset? Remember, the chronology of the posts won't let you lie.... you'll just look like an insipidly stubborn fool if you try to.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You're babbling. What exactly did I say that wasn't factual on the outset? Remember, the chronology of the posts won't let you lie.... you'll just look like an insipidly stubborn fool if you try to.

This is to date ALL of the posts you've made in this thread:

You're not making sense. Bringing in a specialist is not an "appeal to authority", as SHE IS THE AUTHORITY. It's to ensure that IF the case will render a guilty verdict, it will be airtight and above board. Crooks and their lawyers usually don't like that sort of thing, ya know.

BUT NOT THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY IN THIS SITUATION. So no matter how you dance around it, your initial assertion was DEAD Wrong, as is your attempt here to salvage it.

Yet another proof that the Right are intellectually dishonest cowards when faced with some facts that prove them wrong on any level.

There is not one fact in any of them.

 

[Taichiliberal]

This is to date ALL of the posts you've made in this thread:







There is not one fact in any of them.

You're not a stupid person, per se....just a proud MAGA mook full of willful ignorance and stubborn pride.

Pay attention: the first quote is a response to your post, explaining EXACTLY why your statement was wrong by defining the position in question and how it operates in a court case. FACTS that I defy you to disprove.

The second quote was a correction responding to your quip about lawyers, to which you tried to BS around by suddenly claiming humor. Sorry, but that lame tactic didn't work for old Freedumb and it won't work for you.

The third quote is just a comment on your intellectual cowardice, as you've demonstrated on this site time and again.

Now, if you want to talk documentation, that would require YOU to produce some to support your initial statement. If you can't or won't, then don't waste everyone's time with lame bluff & bluster. I suggest no more alcohol, a good dinner and a good night's sleep before your fingers hit the keyboard again. Carry on.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You're not a stupid person, per se....just a proud MAGA mook full of willful ignorance and stubborn pride.

Pay attention: the first quote is a response to your post, explaining EXACTLY why your statement was wrong by defining the position in question and how it operates in a court case. FACTS that I defy you to disprove.

The second quote was a correction responding to your quip about lawyers, to which you tried to BS around by suddenly claiming humor. Sorry, but that lame tactic didn't work for old Freedumb and it won't work for you.

The third quote is just a comment on your intellectual cowardice, as you've demonstrated on this site time and again.

Now, if you want to talk documentation, that would require YOU to produce some to support your initial statement. If you can't or won't, then don't waste everyone's time with lame bluff & bluster. I suggest no more alcohol, a good dinner and a good night's sleep before your fingers hit the keyboard again. Carry on.

Though all that, all it boils down to is you trying to say lawyers are infallible. That's utter bullshit. They're nothing but people with a simple liberal arts degree in law and they make mistakes and errors all the time. Your arguments in the posts I listed amounted to nothing but an irrelevant appeal to authority. In essence, She's a lawyer, so she's right!

No facts, only opinion on your part.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
You're not a stupid person, per se....just a proud MAGA mook full of willful ignorance and stubborn pride.

Pay attention: the first quote is a response to your post, explaining EXACTLY why your statement was wrong by defining the position in question and how it operates in a court case. FACTS that I defy you to disprove.

The second quote was a correction responding to your quip about lawyers, to which you tried to BS around by suddenly claiming humor. Sorry, but that lame tactic didn't work for old Freedumb and it won't work for you.

The third quote is just a comment on your intellectual cowardice, as you've demonstrated on this site time and again.

Now, if you want to talk documentation, that would require YOU to produce some to support your initial statement. If you can't or won't, then don't waste everyone's time with lame bluff & bluster. I suggest no more alcohol, a good dinner and a good night's sleep before your fingers hit the keyboard again. Carry on.

Though all that, all it boils down to is you trying to say lawyers are infallible. That's utter bullshit. They're nothing but people with a simple liberal arts degree in law and they make mistakes and errors all the time. Your arguments in the posts I listed amounted to nothing but an irrelevant appeal to authority. In essence, She's a lawyer, so she's right!

No facts, only opinion on your part.

What is utter bullshit is how you blatantly lie about what others write to suit your revisionist rhetoric and erroneous assertions.

Posts #54 and #57, dear readers. T.A.G. is just in MAGA troll mode, as he can't logically or rationally defend his assertions. I leave him to waste time repeating his BS in various forms.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

What is utter bullshit is how you blatantly lie about what others write to suit your revisionist rhetoric and erroneous assertions.

Posts #54 and #57, dear readers. T.A.G. is just in MAGA troll mode, as he can't logically or rationally defend his assertions. I leave him to waste time repeating his BS in various forms.

Yes, by all means go back and read Taichiliberal's posts and put them in context. Not a fact in any of them.

 

[domer76]

Yes, by all means go back and read Taichiliberal's posts and put them in context. Not a fact in any of them.

Taichiliberal said the same thing I did regarding your claim of appeal to authority.

You have no fucking clue what appeal to authority means. You fucked it up and got it completely wrong. No word play. Merely your same ignorance.

 

[evince]

https://www.bmelaw.com/lawyers-John_Floyd.html


John Floyd was recently described by a client as “probably the leading authority on racketeering in the U.S.” He has a great depth of knowledge and experience in this complex area. Peers say he is “extremely bright, knowledgeable and also very practical on how to get the best results for the client.”

Knowledge:

John authored the preeminent book on state Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes, RICO State By State: A Guide to Litigation Under the State Racketeering Statutes (American Bar Association, Section of Antitrust Law 2011 and 1998). He has also written numerous book chapters and articles on federal and state RICO.

Experience:

The challenges of successfully pursuing and defending RICO cases are considerable. John has handled these cases in federal and state courts on behalf of plaintiffs, defendants, and as a special prosecutor in cases that have attracted national attention. He recognizes and understands the challenges and opportunities that these cases present.

A former Georgia Attorney General once said of John, “When you have a complex RICO question, you get John Floyd’s book and try and figure it out. If you can’t figure it out, you call John.” He has also been described as an “endless education” and “incredibly knowledgeable,” while “nobody outworks him.

DA Willis is certainly ready to go on all the perps on Oct